Member Info for BigBiteNow

Its all in the placing RNS.

I find it bizarre that the placing is being allowed to dominate the debate and yet such strong figures are almost completely ignored. It says a lot about the games that are being played right now.

Genedrive will be launching their Covid test this month and selling it at between £8- £10 per test, with gross margins for the company, expected to be at least 60%.

Sufficient material secured for the first 6m tests, which at mid price £9 would mean minimum £32m in gross margins for every 6m tests sold.

45m shares in issue post raise.

That is what truly matters here, everything else is just noise.

@O&W I have also been in contact with the company over this matter and was told that the 250,000 tests per week, was the guidance given to Genedrive by Cytiva.

So it is significant that Genedrive feel it appropriate to remove the 250,000 figure and retain the 10,000 per hour one.

It is a clear sign that they expect the true figure to be higher than 250,000, which makes sense given that the original figure was supplied prior to the manufacture of the test being proven.

We will no doubt find out over the coming 2-3 weeks but it may have been this perceived limitation that, to a degree at least, has held the valuation back.

Even a mere doubling of capacity, coupled with validation and a CE Mark, would mean a substantial increase in achievable valuations here because for me, orders is not the issue, as nations fight to increase their testing capacities.

From the AVCT RNS today ;

"A consensus view is building around the world that hundreds of millions of COVID-19 tests are going to be required per month for a long period, and that the disease will be endemic after the initial pandemic has passed, meaning that testing for COVID-19 is going to be needed for many years."

There is a massive shortage of available tests. Orders are not going to be a problem, if anything it will be how fast they can produce.

Morning everyone,

Today's RNS ;

"The PCR-based test has completed its pilot manufacturing runs and yielded high performing multiplexed assays for COVID-19 testing."

"we will offer our novel high throughput test in the near future."

Enough said. The GDR/Cytiva test just got significantly de-risked, meaning orders can be placed and priced into the valuation.

Yes and it is important to not become too fixated on the 100,000 test per day government target or indeed the UK market. Other than some 22 countries, all of them small and many isolated in their nature, every country in the world is living with Corona and the same testing regimes are just as relevant

The UK target is also merely a marker. Boris Johnson previously said 250,000 but it was revoked because they couldn't reach it. I am sure if they could up it further they would.

Even if every EU member state just (eventually) hit 100,000 per day, that would be 700,000 x 27 a week, that would still create a capacity need of some 19m tests per week.

US is talking circa 150m a week.

Then there is everyone else.

Yes there are other sources but it is absolutely clear that these countries cannot test anywhere near as much as they need to but those 2 markets alone demonstrate the sort of potential spare capacity in the market place.

At £40m market cap, GDR doesn't need to take a very large percentage of that market to justify its valuation.

"The U.S. will be able to test 8 million per month by May, Giroir told Time."

"Giroir was responding to a new study’s findings. Harvard University published a report last week that said the U.S. would need to ramp up testing capacity to at least 5 million tests a day by early June, and 20 million per day by late July, in order to reopen the economy."

A lot of noise being made about Abbots antibody test and the fact they will ship 20m a month by June.

Aside from the fact it is an antibody laboratory based test, so only useful for the smaller percentage of the world that has actually had Covid, it still would only increase US capacity from 8m to 28m a month.

At 20m tests a day, the US alone requires 600m tests per month.

If the figure is wrong by half then they still need 300m tests per month.

And not a single one of those tests establishes if you are infected now. That's not going to open up economies on its own.

https://twitter.com/BigBiteNow/status/1255752342688931840?s=20

"The U.S. will be able to test 8 million per month by May, Giroir told Time."

"Giroir was responding to a new study’s findings. Harvard University published a report last week that said the U.S. would need to ramp up testing capacity to at least 5 million tests a day by early June, and 20 million per day by late July, in order to reopen the economy."

A lot of noise being made about Abbots antibody test and the fact they will ship 20m a month by June.

Aside from the fact it is an antibody laboratory based test, so only useful for the smaller percentage of the world that has actually had Covid, it still would only increase US capacity from 8m to 28m a month.

At 20m tests a day, the US alone requires 600m tests per month.

If the figure is wrong by half then they still need 300m tests per month.

And not a single one of those tests establishes if you are infected now. That's not going to open up economies on its own.

https://twitter.com/BigBiteNow/status/1255752342688931840?s=20

@Inkose First of all it is an antibody test, not an antigen test, so bears no meaning in terms of the market AVCT are looking to infiltrate.

Also, whilst the progress by Abbot and the numbers are impressive, they are but a drop in the ocean against what is needed.

There are c. 750m people in Europe alone and people will likely need to be tested multiple times. If Abbots can ship 4m a month, 48m a year, they still wouldn't even scratch the surface.

And then there's Africa, America, Asia and so on.

There is plenty of room for many diagnostics test companies and especially for AVCT, whose market (those who have it right now), is for me far greater at this point in time.

Yes GLR1990 yet another strong validation of where the AVCT test should be heading. The 22nd April RNS is already one of the strongest RNSs I have witnessed in my many years of investing with not one but 5-6 future value inflection points strongly indicated towards.

We should not get too far ahead of ourselves but this study, be it at pre-print stage, is a substantially supportive hint towards the potential validity of the AVCT test once analysed.

Given the strong commercial merits of this test, I would expect that Cytiva will be pulling in all required resources to push it through its next stages of development. So news flow over the next few weeks should be very busy indeed.

Morning all,

I have read many messages on this BB regarding people who are new to investing and perhaps feeling somewhat overwhelmed by the situation.

The reality is that there are very few people you can trust when it comes to investing and that number certainly recedes when counting contributors to these forums. I don't say this in order to disrespect anybody's contribution nor as a means to ignore or discount contributions made by those that are genuine in their dealings here. Its just that its extremely difficult to know the difference. This is investment. We are all here to win. Don't forget that.

The harsh reality is that to learn in this game you simply have to go through the experience of it all yourself. The good, the bad and dare I say the ugly, of which there is unfortunately a great deal.

Anyone who has been doing this for a long time, will highly likely have faired very badly at the start and likely needed a great deal of good fortune to pull through any number of investing disasters. The chances of doing better than that at the start are for me very low.

Investing on AIM is hard and making money from it even harder. The complications that exist mean that a bite in the backside is never normally all that far away, even when well researched.

So why am I saying all of this? Well I am simply encouraging those that are truly new to this game to think very carefully about their moves. No profit is a bad profit. No decision in a different investment/share is applicable to the next. Each investment should be taken on its own merits. When a share is flying high it is easy to lose sight of what is important, what is your own goal in all of this and give in to greed. So i encourage individuals to try to find space, find room to think and then decide either way what is best for them and their hard earned.

Nobody is allowed to give investment advice here, me included and nor would I want to. But be careful when reading these constant power words designed to drive sentiment and direction. We are all guilty of it, me included.

It is damn hard being a new investor because you aren't allowed to start fighting at your own level. You are sent straight into professional ranks, which means the bruises and the batterings will be at their hardest until you learn how to fight back. So get learning fast because making money in this game should never be too easy.

When it is, then that is the exact point when we are most vulnerable and must work the hardest.

BBN

@M.McNulty Thanks for coming back to me. No need to get too tied up in discussions, important to keep your own time and not everyone else's.

Just to close out on my earlier point. I have since re-read your investment piece and I note your statement which says ;

"We are led to believe that this was to appease the existing major shareholders, who demanded pre-emption rights."

That is also very plausible but if so, then the whole exercise was handled very poorly, given the hurried nature of the 2nd raise and the lack of lip service paid to it, when the subscription was announced.

Nevertheless i remain open minded and look forward to seeing some TR1s that may shed more light on events.

That aside, I share your enthusiasm and agree that this is the best investment opportunity that i have come across since BMN and I have spent much time searching.

Some used to try to sell me the idea that BMN was expensive when it made its run from 1.3p to 12p. When they raised on 26th March 2018 for what felt like a heavy discount to the price on the day (c. 20%), they was much disgust. However, its not what you raise but what you raise for and how you use it.

The BMN share price never really looked back after that point, adding 380% from the raise date and a total of around 3,600% from its lowest low, driven by wider fundamentals that the funding helped deliver.

No two stories are exactly the same but some things do echo. A 2-300% rise is hefty but it has to be placed in the context of where the business has come from and where it is going to.

One obstacle at a time but AVCT has every chance of being one of those stories for the grandchildren.

Stay focused, remember to review, take stock and where possible keep a cool head because the air can get very thin on journeys like this one.

Apologies, all references to £3m should state £3.75m, being the placement announced on 6th April.

Hello Myles.

One thing that is making me scratch my head whilst trying to avoid making 2+2 any greater than it needs to be, is the wording used for the additional £3.75m in funding.

In the £2m subscription the company referred to their October update by saying ;

"The Company intends to utilize the net proceeds of the Subscription to continue to execute the strategy outlined last October."

That reference was to the 18th October RNS listed strategy, which stated 3 items ;

"• the phase 1 clinical trial of AVA6000 pro-doxorubicin;

• continuing to advance Affirmer immunotherapy pipeline with partners; and

• delivering further commercial progress for therapeutics and diagnostics."

We were all surprised by the additional £3.75m raise, given it was announced just 4 days after the £2m subscription which had included the following statement ;

"Given the current economic climate the Board have deemed it prudent to take on a small amount of additional equity capital at this time to ensure that it is in a strong position to exploit progress after the coronavirus pandemic is over."

So it was not designed to be a part of the finance needed to develop the reagents for the Cytiva partnership.

The other intriguing point here is that when it came, the £3m placement was just 2 days prior to the collaboration announcement with Cytiva.

The one key difference in the £3.75m placement RNS and subsequent circular, is the addition of this line under use of proceeds ;

"developing a small pipeline of Affimer® based diagnostic tests for licensing."

We know from the current agreement with Cytiva that AVCT "retain all the commercial rights to future products" and the circular states "the group is making very good progress with its own pipeline of diagnostic tests which will also
deliver licensing opportunities in the medium term."

However, both the circular and the RNS, pre-date the developments with the Covid Antigen test and the relationship with Cytiva.

It is clear from the accounts that the £2m raise plus the £8m cash on hand, meant AVCT was well supported to see out 2020. Hence why AVCT talked about this additional capital assisting them to be in a "strong position to exploit progress after the coronavirus pandemic is over."

So for me the £3m has to be covid related and its timing was just too damn close to the CVytiva announcement. All of which makes the addition of that line related to licensing all the more intriguing. Be it that 2+2 is still 4, until it isn't any more.

https://twitter.com/avacta/status/1251039204693417984?s=20

@wolves2211 It is important first and foremost to be clear, that an end to Covid is what we all want. Too many friends and family are and will be affected, by this virus and the economic fall out that is yet to come. So whilst making money through investing is of course welcome, it comes second to health.

In terms of a vaccine, even with all the government assistance and hurdle jumping in the world (bear in mind AVCT and Cytiva will highly likely receive the same medicine), its going to take 12 months (absolute minimum) to get a vaccine on the market.

Then said vaccine has got to be produced in quantities that allow every affected country to function at 100% economic capability.

Furthermore, said vaccine is going to be expensive and so who it is given to will be based on a selective process. It is also not beyond reason to expect new strains of Covid to exert themselves as we go through another Winter and possibly beyond, meaning the process has to be re-visited with rapid tests acting as a deterrent and economic support until it is ready.

So at the very least AVCT/Cytiva are going to have a very good run at this until the vaccine is fully bedded in across much of the world. In my opinion, the test is then going to be employed as a hand in hand mechanism to assist ad support any vaccine, as its release to the market is built up.

In addition, when a rapid test becomes available, the demand front end (once appreciated) is going to be astronomical. Even if we are just talking about a concern that Covid will break out once again, organisations are surely going to stock up on very large quantities, as a just in case mechanism to reduce the risk that their businesses will be further affected by said secondary break outs. That's because the cost outlay against doing nothing, has to be justified, given the upheaval caused by stopping works. I would go one step further and predict that any necessary further government aid would be dependent on companies demonstrating they have done everything they can to stay in production. So cost effective rapid testing would be a must, meaning yet more sales.

As individuals seeking peace of mind as we move into Winter 2020, who is not going to buy a box of tests from the chemist, in order to know that when we visit our grandparents, we are not taking Covid with us?

That all said, even if AVCT were to only get 1 good years run at sales of this test, it will do wonders for their financial position and for their moves in the cancer sphere and other areas of their business. It will also place them very much in the shop window in terms of further partnerships in the diagnostic sphere and/or as a business that is potentially worth acquiring.

What better sales pitch could one have than being the ones who brought the first self administered rapid covid test to the market.

A sign of things to come and that the theories are becoming the reality. It does not take too much imagination to conclude that this sort of measure is an absolute necessity in order to get people flying again.

One can also readily imagine a scenario where by government bail outs or loans, will come with caveats that businesses take all reasonable measures to ensure they can operate as fully as they can. Buying a large batch of rapid saliva tests, would be a drop in the ocean costs wise, compared o the costs of grounding planes and paying rental fees. Plus many airlines have contracts that demand that they use their berths or lose them. So again its not hard to imagine just how many airlines will be on the phone for these tests, should they indeed hit the market later this year.

Lastly, whilst the example in the enclosed article is indeed a solution, it is by no means as cost effective as a self administered test. The number of staff shown could be reduced considerably as passengers are encouraged to complete the test in an enclosed area.

This is of course just one avenue for such a test. We could spend a week highlighting further big examples, such as trains, sports events, bars, restaurants, adventure parks. Just think what the likes of Disney could do with such a test. It goes on and on and on.

https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2020/04/15/834999076/emirates-airlines-begins-conducting-rapid-covid-19-tests-for-boarding-passengers

Morning Dryland.

I would encourage investors to read the article carefully. It gives an insight into the level of desperation being shown by the US government, as it fights to reduce what is the biggest break out of Covid to date.

When one reads such things as ;

"Shortly after the FDA authorized the tests, members of the White House’s Covid-19 testing task force called Brooks to congratulate his team and ask how to remove any regulatory or financial hurdles that could prevent the test from being deployed."

And ;

"The test developers also have been contacted by the CEOs of some of the world’s biggest life sciences companies that are involved in coronavirus testing."

These are major signals as to the speed with which valid tests can be brought to market. All standard times for regulatory approvals and processing are out of the window for Covid.

So if that is what the US government and leading life science CEOs will do for a lab based 24-48 hour saliva test, then what are they going to do for a 10 minute home based test, that can be self administered anywhere in the world and whose only limit for deployment, is how fast the partners can produce it.

The decision on whether AVCT has 1 partner or 5 partners, will depend solely on AVCT and AVCT only. This is not about convincing anyone. I would think Cytiva are delighted to be the first and the others are busy trying to make sure they aren't too far behind in the process. A process that is likely moving at considerable speed.

Thank you bopd. Like I said earlier I would very much like the chance to see this page you refer to, myself.

I attempted to use the link you provided but it didn’t work. I then searched the main website employing the various key words you have mentioned but without much luck. Are you able to copy the link to that page so we can judge for ourselves?

An even simpler way to check the figures is to run the accounted $1.673m figure against the average AUD/BRL exchange rate for 2018 and 2019. Not 100% accurate because the figures are shared across half of 2018 and half of 2019.

That would be c. BRL 2.73

= BRL 4.567,290

If we then divide that by your figure of 24,519, we get BRL 186 per ton. Again pretty close.

So it really does feel like the quoted figures are in line with the last set of accounts from HMI, which ran to June 2019 only.

All f which makes sense, given the company has officially confirmed that it sold 50k tons in 2019, which has been issued under more than 1 RNS. So if they were lying then they would have a very big problem on their hands, along with their Nomad Strand Hanson Limited.